OCEAN ACIDIFICATION PREDOMINANTLY

NATURAL.

WHAT IS THE MAIN DRIVER OF PH CHANGE IN THE OCEANS.?
CONTRARY TO POPULAR BELIEF ANTHROPOGENIC Co2 IS FAR
OUTWEIGHED BY PHYTOPLANKTON DECLINE.
Phytoplankton decline = 40 million tons Co2 day.
Anthropogenic Co2 = 7 million tons day.
1.) There has been an estimated 40% decline in global Phytoplankton stock
in the last 100 years. Phytoplankton being plants photosynthesise and
take Co2 out of the system. This primary production is huge and About
half of this CO
2
fixation occurs in the sea, mainly by a type of phytoplankton
called cyanobacteria http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5955/945.short
So a marked decline in photosynthesising phytoplankton in the ocean
will result in a reduction of Co2 fixation leaving the Co2 free to combine into
Carbonic acid and increase the ocean acidification.
The scale of change can be derived from this passage:
The importance of plankton
Planktonic photosynthesis accounts for roughly half of the primary productivity on
earth and plays an important role in the ocean's carbon cycle. If you live by the coast this
means that some of the oxygen that you breathe has come from plankton. As photosynthesis
occurs in phytoplankton, carbon dioxide is incorporated into the cells and taken out of the
environment. During this process more than 100 million tons of inorganic carbon is fixed
each day around the world, reducing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere [1].

http://oceanlink.island.net/ONews/ONews7/plankton.html

A 40% reduction in phytoplankton stock would translate to
approximately 40 million tons of Co2 a day not being fixed into the oceans
as normal. This results in a significant change in ocean PH chemistry.


HOW SIGNIFICANT. ?
This passage explains.. Recent estimates have calculated that 26 percent of all the
carbon released as CO
2
from fossil fuel burning, cement manufacture, and land-use changes
over the decade 20022011 was absorbed by the oceans. (About 28 percent went to plants
and roughly 46 percent to the atmosphere.) During this time, the average annual total
release of was 9.3 billion tons of carbon per year, thus on average 2.5 billion tons went into
the ocean annually.
http://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/how-much-co2-can-the-oceans-take-up/
2,500,000,000 or 2.5 billion tons of anthropogenic Co2 goes annually into the oceans,
which if divided by 365 days results in 6,849,315 tons daily.
Clearly there is more of an effect on the oceans acidy from the 40 million tons a day
from global phytoplankton decline than there is from the anthropogenic atmospheric
carbon dioxides contribution at about 7 million tons. Nearly 6 x the effect.
The allegation has been made that the phytoplankton decline is as a result of AGW
but this must be disputed . Many scientists find nutrient deficiency to be the cause
and the small changes in temperature experienced to be insignificant.

GLOBAL PHYTOPLANKTON DECLINE FROM NUTRIENT
DEFICIENCY.
Scientific papers such as Temperature and Phytoplankton Growth in the Sea
by Richard Eppley (linked below) indicate that there is a positive response in
growth rate of phytoplankton with an increase in temperature.
http://lgmacweb.env.uea.ac.uk/green_ocean/publications/Nano/Eppley72.pdf
Therefore global warming resulting in sea temperature rise actually results in
more phytoplankton. The opposite is seen worldwide and so reduced nutrients
are the obvious choice as cause of this change. After this some effect of
pollution from chemicals could be affecting them.
Climate science allege global warming is affecting the phytoplankton in a
couple of ways. By making the spring bloom start earlier and affecting the
natural nutrient mixing. Just how credible is this.?
Obviously you cannot totally deny any affect but analysis of the scenario
sheds serious doubt on it being primarily responsible for phytoplankton decline.
There is a phase change in the oceans from winter to spring when the turbulent
winter oceans settle down and warm up and the thermocline becomes defined.
Now the nutrients also settle into the oceans. So the alarmists allege the nutrient
distribution will be affected, but not by a lot just now. You have to run a
simulation of continued warming to see any effect. Right now the spring bloom
is triggered by the stratification of the waters due to the arrival of spring. Just
how much affect is a global warming of 0.6 C going to have on the seasons start
date.?
They allege that because its a bit warmer the bloom will be earlier but the
start time is variable anyway by months according to location and the bloom
will actually be larger because of the warming. Unless the nutrients are limited.
Maybe the summer period of naturally lower nutrients will be insignificantly
longer. But no real explanation for a 40% drop in numbers.
It is an insufficient explanation while a far more credible explanation exists.
IRON DEFICIENCY.
The generally agreed view of many scientists is that phytoplankton growth
and distribution is strongly influenced by iron concentrations. A research
document states:
and 10 generally confirmed that the entire community is iron-stressed, with the bloom
forming diatoms strongly iron-limited, whereas the ambient community, dominated by small
phytoplankton, is moderately iron-stressed and experiences strong grazing pressure
(Price et al., 1994; see review by de Baar et al., 2005). Model estimates suggest
community growth limitation by iron over _3050% of the world ocean .
http://www.biogeosciences-discuss.net/4/1241/2007/bgd-4-1241-2007.pdf
Thus there is explained by many papers a direct link between low iron levels
and low phytoplankton levels which in turn affect the Co2 uptake by
photosynthesis thus affecting the PH or causing acidification. In fact 6 x as
much influence as anthropogenic Co2. The nutrient deficiency of iron is
explained naturally due to variations of iron rich dust deposition.
Heres another link to a respectable research document showing the connection.
http://flameglo.lbl.gov/BishopPDFS/0042_2000_Fungetal.pdf
The totally credible iron hypothesis which explains lower phytoplankton
stock worldwide is explained and solutions for it outlined here:
http://www.haidasalmonrestoration.com/index.php/science/ocean-micro-
nutrient-replenishment
After this the global reduction of fish stock by 50-70% due to overfishing is
also affecting the PH. The alkaline buffer layer of water is being changed.
http://www.underwatertimes.com/news.php?article_id=58274310691
And then theres the increase in volcanic activity worldwide thats injecting
more Co2 into the oceans. http://www.thereeftank.com/blog/volcano-rising/
Multiple sources of PH change . Co2 must be relegated to a second division
contributor not the primary cause.

A PH CHANGE FROM 8.2 TO 8.1 HAS BEEN OBSERVED. THIS
RESEARCH INDICATES THAT THE MAJORITY OF THIS IS FROM
GLOBAL PHYTOPLANKTON DECLINE DUE TO NATURAL IRON
DEFICIENCY. (Myles.)